Talk:Lucius Manlius Torquatus (consul 65 BC)

Problems with article
This article, short as it is, is an absolute mess, confusing events of father (Consul 65 BC) and son (Quaestor 49 BC), both of the same name. The introduction and details of the death relate to the son, while the consulship with Cotta and the events with Catiline refer to the father. Will attempt to correct soon. Oatley2112 (talk) 11:21, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "After the suppression of the Catiline conspiracy, Cotta proposed a public thanksgiving for Cicero's services, and because Torquatus had gone into exile for supporting Catiline, supported the view that there was no need of a law for his recall, since the Laws of Clodius were legally worthless." I don't even know where to begin with this sentence. Neither Torquatus nor his son went into exile because they supported Catiline, the Leges Clodiae date from Cicero's exile, not the period of Catiline, nor is it my understanding that the Leges Clodiae were "legally worthless", whatever that means. The only exile that comes anywhere near fitting into this scenario is Aulus Manlius Torquatus, an associate of Cicero, but he was in voluntary exile around 45 BC, and he had nothing to do with Catiline! Ye gods, what a mess! Oatley2112 (talk) 14:45, 4 November 2011 (UTC)